Friday, January 19, 2007

I question their Patriotism

The loons have taken over the asylum:

Polls about what's going to happen in the future don't interest me except in special circumstances. But there is one fascinating result in this poll -- only 63 percent of Americans, and only 51 percent of Democrats want the troop surge to succeed (see question #19). One-third of Dems apparently wish for the failure of an American military mission against al Qaeda, radical Islamist militias, and death squads, and for the slaughter in Baghdad to continue unabated. 15 percent of Dems aren't sure whether that's what they want.

via PowerLine

34% of Democrats want the United States to fail in Iraq and 15% just can't make up their minds whose side they are on. Too bad they did not do this poll before the election.


Anonymous said...

Yes, they do want failure. They are basically isolationists who don't see the consequences of what might happen and who don't care.

But it is primarily motivated by a profound hatred of their own countrymen who don't share their values. I know a very liberal woman who said after the 2004 Florida hurricanes, "who cares, they all voted for Bush." Well. After seeing my reaction, she quickly backed down, telling me "it was just a joke" with a tone in her voice implying that I couldn't take a joke. Except it wasn't really a joke.

There are many, especially on the coasts, who simply see Republicans and Red-Staters and Christians as more evil than Islamofascists. And think of their Red-State countrymen as their primary enemies.

The woman who told me that "joke" about Floridians would never have said of the tsunami victims "who cares, they were all Muslims" as a "joke." It never would have entered her mind.

Fresh Air said...


Liberalism, I'm afraid, is a mental illness. It's not even really liberalism as Roger Simon constantly points out. It's illiberal, reactionary thinking with a deeply leftist worldview. I'm ashamed and appalled that these people exist in such a great country, but they do.

How is this explained? Dennis Prager took a crack at explaining the concept of self-loathing, but I just can't believe that's what it's about. These are not rational beings. They are insane.

Anonymous said...

Well, they don't see themselves as inhabiting the same country as those who serve in its wars. And they are correct - they don't inhabit the same country.

terrye said...

They are morons. They think it makes them cool to stand up to de man. They have no idea what it preally means.

Anonymous said...

The problem is that this elite culture, for lack of a better word, defines itself as standing in heroic Romantic opposition to what it sees as the dominant culture, whether that culture is actually dominant or not. The greater their opposition, the greater their sense of self-worth. They also need control - because they are cultists - and somewhat paradoxically they also need to feel persecuted by the dominant culture which is naturally controlled by evil forces.

If this is at the core of your sense of self-worth, you are in no position to defend that culture, no matter how deep your anxieties about the world outside. In fact, you try to equate the crazy, violent outsiders with the members of the dominant culture.

I know all about religious fanaticism. I went to a Lutheran Sunday School. They are just as bad as the Taliban.

Oh, really?

Well, they have the same tendencies...

I see.

That means that a person in that camp can defend themselves for a bit, and support the dominant culture for a while perhaps, but not do it with much enthusiasm or over any great length of time. Because defending traditional culture simply isn't something you want to do.

terrye said...

I think they are assholes my self. Selfish, self involved, self indulgent, self obsessed, narcissistic nimrods who would last about 2 minutes in a real fight.

JB said...

"They are morons. They think it makes them cool to stand up to de man. They have no idea what it preally means."

The specimen I've met certainly fit this description. Utterly clueless about totalitarianism in contrast to freedom. As in, shockingly out-of-it.

Anonymous said...


...who would last about 2 minutes in a real fight.

Oh, well, of course. I was merely trying to be analytical. :-)

Rick Ballard said...

"...who would last about 2 minutes in a real fight."

That's assuming they blew a Birkenstock and couldn't run on a flat.

terrye said...

I told a guy like this once that I could kick his ass without any help from anyone and if the fact that I was a woman bothered him we could always tie one hand behind my back and even things up a little.

He did not understand what that meant. I thought, forget it, he is too stupid to mess with.